|
| | "Throughout his career as IDM’s retarded uncle, he’s seen fit to weigh in on a variety of genres: trip-hop (early Wagonchrist), drum ‘n’ bass (Plug), acid house (Luke Vibert) and, now, disco (Kerrier District). It is summarily awful. All of it."
This view is so very misguided. That Plug album was one of the most innovative examples of drum & bass ever. Wagon Christ's Throbbing Pouch is a downtempo classic. Many of Vibert's other works show that whimsy and a skewed sense of funk and psychedelia can result in fine, enduring records that outlast similar genre exercises. Anyone who deems as "hopelessly inessential" the output of someone who's recorded so many quality albums for Rephlex, Warp, Ninja Tune and Rising High lacks credibility. |
| |
|
| | Oh, I disagree, grinder. Informed, articulate, mean-spirited — that's my kind of slanderous career assassination. |
| |
| Posted 06/18/2004 - 04:30:11 PM by : |
| | Regarding the two points that you make in your post:
"most innovative examples of drum & bass ever": my view is that it's a record that found its raison d'etre in an of itself. self-conscious "intelligence" at its worst. the only track POSSIBLY worth searching is on the import, which wasn't released in America due to sample clearance issues.
"whimsy and a skewed sense of funk and psychedelia can result in fine, enduring records"
First off, you do it to yourself here: "fine"? If there's anything that I find more inessential, it's a record that's merely "fine". The point about whimsy and skewed senses is obviously agreed upon. Skewed takes on psychedelia and funk aren't really useful in a genre that is ALREADY skewed by definition and have enough whimsy and fun within them to be self-contained (see also this point in my review re: disco). And, as you might expect I don't find "whimsy" to equal enduring. Perhaps that's just me.
|
| |
|
| | Word. |
| |
|
| | Hmm... fine=inessential. You must have like 13 records in your collection, then? Would you care to give us, say, 5 ESSENTIAL electronic albums, so the world can gauge from what lofty post you're dispensing judgment?
My point about Vibert's whimsy is he pulls it off fantastically while so many in this vein fail. I'm not a huge fan of whimsy in music by any means, but Vibert's brand of it is just more creative and texturally enticing than most musicians'.
I just want to say to anybody who is thinking of following the advice of your review: Whom do you trust more--the accumulated wisdom of the owners of labels that have issued warehouses full of great records over the last 15 years and many discerning critics-- or Todd Burns? |
| |
| Posted 06/18/2004 - 07:02:33 PM by : |
| | I feel that fine=essential implies that I have a lot of records and choose not to spend anymore time listening to those made by Vibert. I won’t bother to collect five essential electronic albums because a) I dislike lists and b) you know that I can do make a list of 100 electronic records that are more essential than Vibert. To put it simply, I find him to be a casual tourist of a lot of genres and not generally excelling in any of them. Your final point is a cogent one: whom do you trust? After hearing this record, I believe that the majority of discerning listeners will agree with me. But, the trust issue, and the debate associated with it, is the whole point of this site. I feel I made a firm argument that was supported by many points. I think you have as well. It's really up to the listener to find out. I, for one, don't envy them with this particular one when so much better music in the same vein has already been released and is widely available (as is the case in any other genre that Vibert has tackled).
|
| |
|
| | I would like to point out, though, that Todd is far from alone in finding Vibert boring (which is a far more mortal sin than being bad). He does credible takes on all those genres, yes, but for those looking for anything more than (yet) another okay drum 'n' bass/acid house/trip-hop/insert genre here record, Vibert is, in fact, massively inessential. |
| |
|
| | I can see how some people can hate Vibert's aesthetic; he's definitely not for everyone. But to call him boring is simply way off the mark. I have a hard time imagining the dullness of a mind that finds Vibert's music boring. There's so much going on in most of his music, that you have to be catatonic not to at least appreciate it on a production level alone. His sounds may not engage you, but they are far from boring.
Really, Todd, don't be coy. Tell me who you think is making essential electronic music, music that renders Vibert's a colossal waste of time. I'm patient; take as long as you like. |
| |
| Posted 06/19/2004 - 02:53:27 AM by : |
| | Here are a sampling of artists for each guise that Vibert has taken that, in one way or another, far outstrip anything he’s released and render the pseudonym inessential. (Plug) : Squarepusher, Omni Trio, Roni Size, Goldie, Photek, A Guy Called Gerald, 4Hero, Mike Paradinas. (Wagonchrist) : Massive Attack, DJ Shadow, Coldcut, A Forest Mighty Black, DJ Vadim, The Aloof, Red Snapper. (Luke Vibert) : Adonis, Fingers Inc., The KLF, Phuture, Farley Jackmaster Funk, James Cotton, Dan Bell. (Kerrier District) : Black Devil, Metro Area, Cybotron, Liquid Liquid, Daniel Wang, Love Committee, Patrick Adams, the Salsoul Orchestra, Leroy Burgess, Glenn Underground. |
| |
| Posted 06/19/2004 - 03:05:03 AM by : |
| | Another thing that I heard tonight which is rather amazing in the Kerrier District vein, but done years before: Dance Reaction. |
| |
| Posted 06/19/2004 - 03:08:07 AM by : |
| | Which I can only imagine he was trying to reference on "Disco Bus". The original renders it completely ineffectual, however. |
| |
|
| | "His sounds may not engage you, but they are far from boring." Don't let that cognitive dissonance get you down, Grinder. |
| |
|
| | Mathers: Music can be unengaging, but still not bore. I've heard some Albert Ayler that fits this context. I would not call Ayler's music boring at all, but the album I heard failed to engage me. It's possible.
Thanks for the list, Todd. These artists may do their respective things better than Vibert (we could debate this forever), but I still think it's misguided to call Vibert's music worthless, to consign it all to history's rubbish bin. Such an extreme statement still tarnishes your credibility, in my estimation.
Gawd, we absolutely MUST get on with our lives now, eh? |
| |
|
| | Ah, I see where we differ: To me, saying a piece of music is boring is not intended to be universally applicable; thus, if it doesn't engage me that it why it is boring. You meant something different by it. And if you like Vibert, then of course Todd's review should in some way diminish is credibility for you. You now know your views differ from his in a certain way, and can extrapolate outwards to try to figure out which of his other views you may find fault with. Isn't that good criticism? |
| |
|
| | Good criticism is that which concurs with my own opinions. [Insert snide emoticon here.] I'm off to get my drink on and go see Proem. That's entertainment, my brothers. |
| |